It is rather shortsighted on the part of Newa to ask for a separate province along with others asking for ethnic provinces. What needs to be remembered is that each province will be unitary (centralized) and the problem of exclusion will still persist. Therefore, what is required is devolution of authorities to the grassroots, in which case we won’t need to fragment this “tiny” country. If fragmentation couldn’t be avoided then I too prefer provinces based on river basins such that optimal exploitation of our famed water resources could be assured.
Where the capital is located isn’t a big issue. In view of many factors (unavailability of many essentials) I too agree that it is time the capital is shifted. But which location is appropriate should be decided after making a thorough study. In my considered opinion Chitwan (I take it you mean Bharatpur/Narayangarh) is not appropriate as it has already grown in an unplanned (and haphazard) fashion. As all new capitals (New Delhi, Islamabad, etc.) we should locate it where we can start from a scratch - a well planned national capital.
With best regards,
Ratna Sansar Shrestha
From: YB Thapa [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2009 15:13
To: 'Ratna Sansar Shrestha'
Subject: RE: Fw: Article in Nepali Times # 467
Federalism is bad, centralism worse. The bettering with federalism is that it provides many chairs for the politicians who otherwise have a questionable productivity. Some 25 years before , I had publish a paper in CNAS Journal to imply three provincial governments in Koshi, Gandaki and Karnali river basins. Now if the Newa want a separate state in the Kath-valley, so be it. We will shift the national capital to Chitwan along both banks of Narayani river. What is your opinion in it.
From: Ratna Sansar Shrestha [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 1:36 PM
Subject: [!! SPAM] Fw: Article in Nepali Times # 467
Jumping the gun
Federalism is fraught with potential failure